Ron Paul on the IRS

April 12, 2006 at 2:20 pm | In Libertarian Rants, Ron Paul |

I'm pretty critical when it comes to the IRS, and I'm sure many people would think my beliefs on the IRS (short answer: abolishment) are too extreme. However, Congressman Ron Paul has recently spoken on this issue and has a very compelling argument that few would be able to refute:

Even today, individual income taxes account for only approximately one-third of federal revenue. Eliminating one-third of the proposed 2007 budget would still leave federal spending at roughly $1.8 trillion – a sum greater than the budget just 6 years ago in 2000! Does anyone seriously believe we could not find ways to cut spending back to 2000 levels?

He is talking about what would happen if we were to completely abolish the IRS today. What would happen? The US would have 1/3 less cash than it would otherwise, but the remaining 2/3 would still be more than the entire 2000 budget. This points out two things to me:

  1. The IRS would be really easy to reform, if not outright abolish. The Government would still have a plethora of avenues to aquire revenue, including constitutional methods: tarrifs and excise taxes. Even if we just abolished the IRS and did nothing else, the government would still have as much incoming revenue as it did in 2000!
  2. If the government would have the same revenue as it did in 2000 by cutting out an entire 1/3 of the budget, what does that say about the government's spending habits?? That means a massive increase in the budget in just the past six years.

What is so important that we're doing now that we weren't doing back in 2000? The war? Not many today will argue that anymore. We can end the war, we can get rid of all the pork spending in Washington if our Congressman are allowed to at least read the bills before they're passed and by so doing we can easily restore this nation to using constitutional methods of taxation. It just takes a bit of (re-)education:

[Education] is favourable to liberty. Freedom can exist only in the society of knowledge. Without learning, men are incapable of knowing their rights, and where learning is confined to a few people, liberty can be neither equal nor universal. –Dr. Benjamin Rush (1786)

Update: As soon as I posted this, someone mentioned to me after reading the above mentioned article by Mr. Paul that he never specifically mentions abolishing the IRS. True, it wasn't explicit; It was implicit. Mr. Paul speaks out about this a lot, so it's not very difficult to find where he stands on the issue:

By the way, when I say cut taxes, I don't mean fiddle with the code. I mean abolish the income tax and the IRS, and replace them with nothing. Ron Paul (2002)


14 Comments »

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

  1. Get rid of the IRS is a good idea.
    I did not like the tarrifs and excise tax part.

    Comment by Paul Richmond — October 6, 2007 #

  2. Paul, Thanks for dropping by.

    I'm neither a fan of tarrifs nor excises. I wrote this over a year ago and having been detached from it for that long I can see how it looks like I was advocating that.

    My point was that tarrifs and excises are one of the least offensive forms of taxation. But they are still offensive.

    Tarrifs and excises are avoidable to at least an extent. Gasoline taxes are at least somewhat avoidable — I can choose to ride a bike for instance. Cigarette taxes — I can choose not to smoke. I don't, however, have a (legal) choice to not pay an income tax. I also don't have a choice to not have my money inflated. These last two forms of taxation (The IRS and the Fed) are unconstitutional and the most offensive.

    If I could, I would get rid of all taxes. But this post was meant to show how obvious and easy it would be to get rid of the biggest offender: the IRS.

    Comment by ryan — October 7, 2007 #

  3. Where exactly does the other 2/3 of the budget come from?

    Comment by jill — October 30, 2007 #

  4. Hi Jill,

    The short answer? Inflation, tarrifs and excise taxes.

    Comment by ryan — October 31, 2007 #

  5. I really like the idea of the abolishment (as a libertarian) of the IRS. However, I feel shaky when I can't see both sides of the issue in full debate. Maybe it's because I havn't done enough research, but I still only see the "lighter" side of Dr. Paul's intentions. Could someone maybe bring up the possible (or theoretical) cons of X-ing the IRS and other of Ron's propositions? And maybe a more detailed explination of his many youtube video interviews and debates. Thanks a bunch.

    Comment by Josh Schaffer — November 30, 2007 #

  6. So we only get 1/3 of the capital money from the IRS. The remaining 2/3 is still greater than the 2000 budget? whoa…

    Comment by Jordan Hegewald — December 4, 2007 #

  7. Get rid of the IRS and institute a national sales tax. No Income tax.

    Comment by Greg — December 11, 2007 #

  8. Unfortunately, the notion of abolishing the IRS is too good to be true. I would want to see a viable budget utilizing only non IRS funds, then move forward. The cost of fuel alone has had to had a major impact on the US budget.

    Comment by Kane — December 31, 2007 #

  9. Is there a LAW that states that YOU have to pay your income tax??

    Where is it?

    Is it normal that the Federal Reserve is a private bank, not owned by America or Americans? Why is it not nationalized? (Why is the Bank of Canada nationalized and not privatized???)

    Get rid of the Federal Reserve System, and you'll get rid of the IRS….

    Comment by Fred — January 5, 2008 #

  10. I agree with Kane (12-31-07) and maybe it's because that's all I have ever known. I don't mind paying my fair share because the money has to come from some where in order for the government to provide services and have a military. Obviously if we can maintain the same life style that we now have or better and not pay income tax that would be fabtastic but we need to see a plan and some results and not just talk.

    Comment by Mike — January 11, 2008 #

  11. Im a ron paul supporter but he said that in 2000 we had that much money in our income rev. but the value of the dollar has gone down. can someone explain this to me?

    Comment by al kreis — January 18, 2008 #

  12. Michael Minns has called the IRS out face to face on MSNBC when he debated the former IRS Commissioner. He explored how the IRS uses inappropriate pressure on the private citizen because they are unorganized and cannot defend themselves. Corporations, who originally were the ONLY income tax payers (the capital gains tax) now can easily escape via the cracks of the tax code which are there especially to serve them. This is how politicians get elected, by going along with lobbyist-instituted changes to the tax code which allow them (big money) to avoid paying into the public sphere, or to only do so to a neglible degree. I think a fair flat tax would still at least address the issue, but it is debatable whether private individuals should have to pay a tax in a country where corporations make the lion share of all profit to begin with. The Wesley Snipes Trial is an extreme example of someone unsuccessfully, even foolishly trying to evade the income tax on principle, but this is mainly because he did not address the issue clearly and properly. If he had not written bad checks as if he owed taxes, perhaps he could have argued a case that could have been leveraged in an activist way all the way through to the Supreme Court, which might have started a more clear debate on income taxes. Additionally, there seems to be little-to-no transparency in how tax funds are being spent in my view. $1,000 hammers and the like are often what they are spent on, right?

    Comment by John — January 31, 2008 #

  13. Ron Paul wrote the forward on Minn's book, The Underground Lawyer. The IRS should be reformed, but I'm not sure it should be abolished. A value Added TAX or flat tax that is simple would reduce the beaucracy of the IRS and take away much the of the corruption. The tax court is all screwy though. Ron Paul is right, guilty till proven innocent is not the American way of justice whatsoever. Reform is the way.

    Comment by Tim — February 6, 2008 #

  14. Fred is dead on. The Problem is how? Every dollar that circulates thru the US is owned by the central bank… and LOANED to the US with interest already attached at the time of loan.

    The US takes out loans from the central bank to pay back other loans owed to the central bank. And each loan is taken out with interest attached. See something wrong there? Its a no win.

    Also since the central bank owns all the money that cirulates here… they have the power to regulate the worth of the money. They can crash this country at will. So playing with the IRS or the central banks is dangerous.

    Why? Ohhhhhh lets see… crash the dollar and we need an alternative currency right? Got any gold laying around? Not likely. Old US currency used to be 'redeemable in gold'. Now its 'legal tender' meaning it isnt worth anything. You may notice television commercials and other ads trying to get people to sell their gold at Top Dollar price. These people know what theyre doing. Dont fall for that scam.

    You see… if were talking about reform we need to not even consider the 'good' candidates. There arent any. They arent "elected" - they are "selected" before theyre even presented to us. The agenda is the same no matter whos doing the speaking. Ron Paul or any other anti this or anti that politician is still pushing the same thing.

    For those who dont know… look up the North American Union and the Amero and see what Bush has already done without approval of congress… and more importantly without approval of the people. And dont forget… Bush Jr was the big strong Christian valued "right" choice.

    Comment by M97SAGE — April 28, 2008 #

Leave a comment

XHTML: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Powered by WordPress.
Entries and comments feeds. Valid XHTML and CSS. ^Top^
XML Sitemap